Academic Senate
2011-2012 

Home

Student Learning
Outcomes

Let's Talk About
Teaching and Learning

Board Policy
Review

The Ed
Center

Flex Day
Info

Committees

President's Notes

 

October 20, 2011

 

College Council

In an information item regarding reorganization of the Facilities area, it was revealed that administration is recommending to the board that the Director of Facilities Position should be eliminated. Board to act on Tuesday afternoon. More information from the College Council website

 

We also had a thin client presentation and demonstration (I didn't see the demonstration).

 

AAAG

No meeting since our last Academic Senate meeting. Will vote on faculty position prioritization next Wednesday.

 

ASCCC SLO Committee

Regional SLO meeting NOT HERE October 29

Delayed for planning purposes until late November or even 2012.

 

MPC SLO Committee

Has drafted a plan for addressing ACCJC recommendations 1-3.

On today's agenda

 

MPC Board of Trustees

I will be collaborating with Doug to give a presentation to the board about the Chancellor's Office Student Success Task Force Draft Recommendations.

What should I say?

My current idea is to keep it at a philosophical level and explain what is important to faculty members.

Some themes I've been thinking about:

College is different than high school. What makes it different? How do these recommendations impact those differences?

top-down vs faculty control

Opposed to a strict, Required, student Ed Plan that comes early in the educational career.

And that causes a loss of funding for courses not in the Ed Plan.

Individuality, local control, ability to follow an interest, accountability.

Opposition to performance-based, or completions-based funding. These recommendations do everything but this and clearly set the stage for it.

Opposed to "alternative funding mechanisms," with strings attached.

Opposed to student success score cards

 

Doug's draft ppt presentation is at a pretty detailed level responding to specific recommendations

 

Repeatability vs Repetition

Repeatability Repetition
This is for certain courses that have been defined as "repeatable" based on pedagogy.
Current T5 (which was recently revised in this area) has four "takes" of a course, or family of courses, that are designed as "activity" or "repeatable" courses.

Under pressure from the Chancellor's and Legislative offices, the ASCCC is recommending changes that define repeatability based on discipline.

Those recommendations are here. There will be voted on at the Fall Plenary.

Recommendations Regarding Repeatability

Recommendations can then be taken to the Consultation Council and on to the Board of Governors. We understand that if these recommendations are not approved, then the ASCCC, representing the faculty, will have no way to recommend any changes.

Three “Takes” of a Course: Limiting Withdrawals and Repetition to Alleviate Substandard Grades

by Beth Smith, ASCCC Vice President

 

This is a done deal. Three "takes" no matter what the grade: F, D, C, B, A, W, CR, NC, whatever. No grandfathering.

 

The goal is to now to educate students and faculty about these new regulations and make recommendations to the institution to make changes so that these new regulations cause as little disruption to students' lives as possible.

 

See the linked paper for implications and ideas.

 

 

Agenda Items for November 3.

 

Board Policy

The Executive Committee is asking you to bring this policy to your divisions for comment NOW, so that we can have an informed discussion on November 3.

Proposed BP 3040 --Community Service Program

Existing BP 3040

 

E-mail from Mike Gilmartin providing background for the Community Service board policy:

Fred,

 

This is mainly a cleanup of the original board policy that was approved in 1988.  We had not looked at this in quite a long time and we wanted to make sure it was up to date.  So, I reviewed the language that the League version of the policy had and made a few tweaks to our policy.  I also tried to make the language clearer in a few places especially when it comes to the funding of these programs.  I don’t see any of this as major changes from the original policy.  We do want this policy to be current and in place in case we decide to move forward with community service in the future. Let me know if you have specific questions.

 

Michael